1 |
Hi all. |
2 |
|
3 |
Recently, I start working on optional atom specifiers feature in |
4 |
userpatch facility: if package directory name starts with percent sign, |
5 |
following word threated as a regular Portage atom, e.g |
6 |
"/etc/portage/patches/sys-kernel/%<=gentoo-sources-5.4" == |
7 |
"<=sys-kernel/gentoo-sources-5.4". This might be very useful in cases |
8 |
when patches applied to minor updates, but major update breaks it (e.g., |
9 |
in Linux kernel), so I want to specify smth like "=gentoo-sources-5.4*". |
10 |
I added new command in portageq to match two atoms and call it from |
11 |
eapply_user function in phase-function.sh, in same manner as |
12 |
has_version/best_version are called it. But recently I found that |
13 |
eapply_user implemented in Portage only in EAPI 6, and there is its |
14 |
predecessor, epatch_user, implemented in epatch.eclass. So, ebuilds with |
15 |
EAPI<6 (I found 4463 in last gentoo snapshot) will ignore new "atomic" |
16 |
patch directories. Obviously, this is rather confusing, unacceptable |
17 |
behaviour. |
18 |
|
19 |
Can I patch epatch.eclass in gentoo repository to implement new |
20 |
userpatch facility for older EAPIs? I guess that EAPI version is |
21 |
considered as stable, unchangeable behaviour of all functions, but in |
22 |
other side, this feature doesn't changes anything existing: old |
23 |
userpatch semantics preserves and order of applying |
24 |
(${P}-${PR},${P},${PN}) not changed, seeking for atoms added at tail. |